On 11 Feb 2009, at 09:03, Harry Halpin wrote:
> Also, it may be educational to look other Incubator Group's charters.
> See Emergency Interoperability Incubator Group [1] and Rich Web
> Backplane Incubator Group [2].
Well spotted Harry...As a co-chair for one of these XGs, I can say
quite categorically that we are better off scoping small. This does
not mean we cannot decide to do other work (once the XG is up) but my
experience is that there is a lot of euphoria at the beginning, then
there is a large plateau of silence...
I have already expressed strong support [1] for a charter based around
the fundamentals of interoperability for social networks.
For the Privacy/Trust work, I suggested that this be done in
collaboration with the existing W3C Policy IG (PLING) [2] for the very
real reason that this group already has this experience and expertise
(its an open group so anyone can join) and have an existing concrete
liaison with the PrimeLife Project, which has just produced its
Requirements document [3] on Policies (aka Privacy, Trust,
Identification, Rights) where Social Networks are one of the key Use
Cases. It makes sense to build on this work with a joint PLING/XG
report.
Cheers...
Dr Renato Iannella
Principal Scientist, National ICT Australia (NICTA)
Level 5, Axon Building #47, Staff House Rd, St Lucia, QLD, 4072,
AUSTRALIA
[research] http://spin.nicta.org.au
[1] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-social-web-talk/2009Feb/0020.html
>
[2] <http://www.w3.org/Policy/pling/wiki/Main_Page>
[3] <http://www.primelife.eu/images/stories/deliverables/h5.1.1-policy_requirements-public.pdf
>